Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40461145›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Patients and physiotherapy professionals' perspectives on group-based treatments: a systematic review protocol.

Mélanie Le Berre, Maude Laberge, Farzaneh Yousefi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mélanie Le BerreFaculté de médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8461-4274
Maude LabergeFaculté de médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada maude.laberge@fmed.ulaval.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1274-136X
Farzaneh YousefiFaculté de médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPhysiotherapy is a recommended treatment for a wide range of conditions. However, waitlists can delay access to care, leading to poorer patient outcomes and added strain on healthcare systems. Group-based physiotherapy treatments have shown comparable clinical effectiveness to individual care and may help address these challenges. Despite this potential, their implementation in practice remains limited. Therefore, this systematic review aims to: (1) identify the determinants of use, intention to use, satisfaction, attitudes and experience with group-based treatments of patients and physiotherapy professionals, such as physiotherapists or physiotherapy technologists and (2) assess the factors that may influence patients' and professionals' preferences for group-based treatments over individual treatments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Systematic searches were conducted on 6 September 2024 in the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO CINAHL and Cochrane databases to identify studies published in French or English, in line with the language proficiency of the review team. Eligible studies will use quantitative, qualitative or mixed-method designs and report original data on the use or intention to use, satisfaction with, attitudes toward and experiences with group-based physiotherapy treatments, from either patients or physiotherapy professionals. Studies will be screened by two independent reviewers, with any discrepancy resolved through consensus or by involving a third reviewer. Data will be extracted from the included studies by two independent reviewers using a predefined data extraction form, with any discrepancy similarly resolved. For quantitative findings, the direction of the relationship between the outcomes and their determinants will be reported, along with the magnitude and significance of the coefficients, where available. For qualitative findings, relevant quotes will be provided to illustrate the relationship between the outcomes and their determinants. All included studies will be assessed by two independent reviewers using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, with any discrepancy resolved again through consensus or by involving a third reviewer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review as it involves the collection of data from existing publications only. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and presentations at relevant conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024574513.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPatient SatisfactionPhysical TherapistsPhysical Therapy ModalitiesHumansResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicHealth Services AccessibilityPhysical Therapy ModalitiesSystematic Review

Identifiers

PMID40461145
PMCPMC12142124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.